Synod15: listen to Scripture and experience

Yesterday's commemoration of the 50th anniversary of the institution of the Synod of Bishops was undoubtedly crowned by Pope Francis' landmark speech, whose translation I shared yesterday. However, it was preceded by a masterful address by Cardinal Christoph Schönborn in which he argued that the first council of the Church - the Council of Jerusalem that is reported in the Acts of the Apostles - ought to serve as a model for the Synod. While the full text of Cardinal Schönborn's talk is very much worth reading, I will only share a translation of some passages here, since it is not available in English yet:

"It all began with a dramatic conflict: "Some who had come down from Judea were instructing the brothers, “Unless you are circumcised according to the Mosaic practice, you cannot be saved.”" (Acts 15:1). That was not a harmless thing. It was about salvation or damnation. What was at stake was the entire Christian way. Not only teaching, but life. No wonder that the question triggered a great argument: "Because there arose no little dissension and debate by Paul and Barnabas with them, it was decided that Paul, Barnabas, and some of the others should go up to Jerusalem to the apostles and presbyters about this question." (Acts 15:2). It is therefore not surprising that "much debate had taken place" (Acts 15:7) also in Jerusalem. Because when they were all together, "some from the party of the Pharisees who had become believers stood up and said, “It is necessary to circumcise them and direct them to observe the Mosaic law.”" (Acts 15:5).

The conflict over Gentile Christians shows something very important: It was spoken about. It was openly called by name and openly handled. [...]

I see the most important lesson about the "synodal way" of the Early Church in its methodos, in the way in which the young Church has resolved this dramatic conflict. They have not written theological arguments, against which theological counterarguments would then be formulated and submitted. Theological debate is important and essential. It belongs to the synodos, begun by Pope Francis, in which he chose the theme of "Marriage and Family" that triggered an intense theological debate in the whole Church. I see this as a real win for the "organic development" of the doctrine of the Church. [...]

However, the Early Church has uses a different method to finding a decision for resolving the conflict. This method is surely also important for theological debate. It is even more important for the success of the synodal path. Let us listen to the report in the Acts of the Apostles:

"The apostles and the presbyters met together to see about this matter. After much debate had taken place, Peter got up and said to them, “My brothers, you are well aware that from early days God made his choice among you that through my mouth the Gentiles would hear the word of the gospel and believe. And God, who knows the heart, bore witness by granting them the holy Spirit just as he did us. He made no distinction between us and them, for by faith he purified their hearts. Why, then, are you now putting God to the test by placing on the shoulders of the disciples a yoke that neither our ancestors nor we have been able to bear? On the contrary, we believe that we are saved through the grace of the Lord Jesus,g in the same way as they.”"(Acts 15:6-11)

Briefly put, Peter gives an account of what God himself has done and thereby decided: The method that Peter uses, is the recounting of the acts of God. We can also say that he reports what he has experienced as a working of God. From this he draws conclusions. These are not the result of theological reflections, but an attentive looking at and listening to God's work.

How does the "Synod", the Assembly, react to the Peter speech? "The whole assembly fell silent" (Acts 15:12). They do exactly what Pope Francis had asked us to do in the Synod of last year: Peter spoke with Parrhesia. And the congregation listened "humbly". The testimony of Peter doesn't immediately get "torn apart" and criticized in a great debate. His word is received with silence, and can therefore be "kept in [their] heart" (cf. Lk. 2:19,51). How important is this silence and this listening with the heart! With this attitude, they are then ready to receive the testimony of Paul and Barnabas: "The whole assembly fell silent, and they listened while Paul and Barnabas described the signs and wonders God had worked among the Gentiles through them."(Acts 15:12).

They described! They gave no theological treatise. They did not theorize abstractly about the salvation of the Gentiles, instead they presented what they had "seen and heard" (cf. Acts 4:20). What Peter and John said before the Sanhedrin, is even more true for the meeting of the church in Jerusalem: "It is impossible for us not to speak about what we have seen and heard" (Acts 4:20).

The testimony of Paul and Barnabas too at first stops the Church in its tracks: It doesn't get discussed straightaway, but heard and kept in the heart. "After they had fallen silent, James responded, “My brothers, listen to me. Symeon has described how God first concerned himself with acquiring from among the Gentiles a people for his name."(Acts 15:13f). James confirmed what Peter has said already: God himself has intervened and decided the matter.

James then presents words of the prophets as an authority, which confirm in advance what the Lord is doing these days, "acquiring from among the Gentiles a people for his name" (Acts 15:14). Scripture and experience thereby agree. In listening to both Scripture and experience, the Assembly recognizes the way and will of God. Thus arrives a joint decision "the apostles and presbyters, in agreement with the whole church" (Acts 15:22). It is said then: "It is the decision of the holy Spirit and of us not to place on you any burden beyond these necessities, namely, to abstain from meat sacrificed to idols, from blood, from meats of strangled animals, and from unlawful marriage." (Acts 15:28f).

The Acts of the Apostles the report the reception of the decisions of Jerusalem: "When the people read it, they were delighted with the exhortation (paraklêsei)" (Acts 15:31). It is nice when the result of a synod encourages the faithful! It is not always the case that, what finally emerges from a synod, is received with such joy."

Wow! A beautiful exegesis of this proto-synod, lives by Jesus' immediate disciples.

The same event also saw addresses by cardinals from all five continents, from which I'd just like to share Cardinal Vicent Nichols' personal experience of observing the participants of the Second Vatican Council:

"I started my seminary formation in 1963. In September of that year, at the age of 17, I arrived in the Venerable English College, here in Rome, shortly before the Second Session of the Second Vatican Council. For these meetings of the Council all the bishops of England and Wales resided in the English College. For a young 17 year old, the sight of so many bishops was a wonder to behold! I had never seen anything like it. I have become more accustomed to it now! But it was there that I learned my first lesson in the meaning of Episcopal Collegiality, 'collegialitas affectiva'.

If I remember correctly, during that second session, each morning the bishops came down the College staircase, one by one, and were collected at the door, individually, and brought by car to St Peter’s Basilica for the day's proceedings of the Council. It was the prince bishop escorted fittingly to his important task.

By the third and fourth sessions of the Council, however, the scene had changed. Now the bishops came down the stairs together, walking out of the doors of the College and on into the Piazza Farnese where they all entered a bus and travelled together for their day’s work. Now they were brothers in the Lord, bound together in the challenge of a shared task, being fashioned into an affective college in a new spirit flowing through the Church. The Synod of Bishops, created in 1965, was a key way in which that spirit was to be expressed and strengthened. Without doubt, it has fashioned strong and enriching relationships between bishops and between bishops and the Holy Father which would have been unimaginable before the Council."

On Friday, Archbishop Blase Cupich gave an extensive interview in which he also spoke about the topic of a new language:

"We have to speak to families the way families recognize themselves. Yes it’s important to have various general principles, categories, words from our tradition and so on, and yet if we really do want to engage people they have to recognise that we know their life in the way that we speak.

It’s interesting: the word ‘indissolubility’, what we heard is that in different cultures, especially in the east, that word says too much for people, or it’s too hard a word to understand. People understand ‘lifelong fidelity’, but it seems too much of a juridical term to describe the richness and complexity of what a marriage means for people and their culture. I had never heard that before. But I get it. Because what it conveys is not the indissolubility of a wedding band, but handcuffs."

Pope Francis: like in an inverted pyramid

On the 50th anniversary of the institution of the Synod of Bishops, Pope Francis set out a vision for the Church that has, I believe, a strong chance to end up his most important speech. Since there is no English translation of the full text yet, the following is my, rough attempt of the text (with the exception of the opening words of thanks to the event's participants).

“The world we live in, and that we are called to love and serve also in its contradictions, requires from the Church a strengthening of synergies in all areas of her mission. It is precisely the way of synodality that God expects from the Church of the third millennium.

What the Lord asks of us, in a sense, is already all contained in the word “synod”. Walking together - Laity, Pastors, Bishop of Rome - is an easy concept to express in words, but not so easy to put into practice.

After confirming that the People of God is formed by all the baptized who are called to “be a spiritual house and a holy priesthood”, the Second Vatican Council proclaims that “the entire body of the faithful, anointed as they are by the Holy One, (cfr. 1 Jn 2:20 and 27) cannot err in matters of belief and manifest this special property by means of the whole peoples' supernatural discernment in matters of faith when “from the Bishops down to the last of the lay faithful” they show universal agreement in matters of faith and morals”. That famous infallible “in credendo” [“in believing”].

In the Apostolic Exhortation Evangelii Gaudium I underlined how “the people of God is holy thanks to this anointing, which makes it infallible in credendo”, adding that “each baptized, whatever their position in the Church or their level of instruction in the faith, are agents of evangelization, and it would be insufficient to envisage a plan of evangelization to be carried out by professionals while the rest of the faithful would simply be passive recipients”. The sensus fidei [sense of the faith] impedes a rigid separation between Ecclesia docens [the teaching Church] and Ecclesia discens [the learning Church], since the Flock too has its own “nose” for discerning the new ways that the Lord reveals to the Church.

It was this conviction that guided me when I wished for the whole People of God to be consulted in preparation for the double synod on the family, as is usually done and as was done with any “Lineamenta” [guidelines]. Certainly, a consultation of this kind could in no way be enough to listen to the sensus fidei. But how would it have been possible to talk about the family without consulting families, listening to their joys and their hopes, their sorrows and their anguish? Through the answers to the two questionnaires sent to the particular Churches, we had the opportunity to hear at least some of them regarding the issues that closely affect them and about which they have much to say.

A synodal Church is a Church of listening, knowing that listening “is more than hearing”. It is a mutual listening in which everyone has something to learn. Faithful people, the College of Bishops, Bishop of Rome: each one listening to the others; and all listening to the Holy Spirit, the “Spirit of truth” (Jn 14:17), to know what he “says to the Churches” (Rev 2:7).

The Synod of Bishops is the convergence point of this dynamic of listening, conducted at all levels of Church life. The synodal process starts by listening to the People, which “shares also in Christ's prophetic office”, according to a principle dear to the Church of the first millennium: “Quod omnes tangit ab omnibus tractari debet” [What touches all should be considered by all]. The path of the Synod proceeds by listening to the Pastors. Through the Synod Fathers, the Bishops act as true stewards, interpreters and witnesses of the faith of the whole Church, who must be able to carefully distinguish the often changing flows of public opinion. On the eve of the Synod of last year I stated: “For the Synod Fathers we ask the Holy Spirit first of all for the gift of listening: to listen to God, that with him we may hear the cry of the people; to listen to the people until breathing in the will to which God calls us”. Finally, the synodal process culminates in listening to the Bishop of Rome, called upon to pronounce as “Pastor and Teacher of all Christians”: not by starting with his personal convictions, but as the supreme witness of the fides totius Ecclesiae [faith of all the Church], “guarantor of the obedience and the conformity of the Church to the will of God, to the Gospel of Christ, and to the Tradition of the Church”.

The fact that the Synod always acts cum Petro et sub Petro [with Peter and under Peter] - therefore not only cum Petro, but also sub Petro - is not a restriction of freedom, but a guarantee of unity. In fact the Pope, by the will of the Lord, “the perpetual and visible principle and foundation of unity of both the bishops and of the faithful.” To which is related the concept of “ierarchica communio” [hierarchical communion] employed by Vatican II: the Bishops are united with the Bishop of Rome by the bond of episcopal communion (cum Petro) and are at the same time hierarchically subjected to him as head of the college (sub Petro).

Synodality, as a constitutive dimension of the Church, gives us the most appropriate interpretive framework for understanding hierarchical ministry. If we understand that, as St. John Chrysostom says, “Church and Synod are synonyms,” - because the Church is none other than the “walking together” of the Flock of God along the paths of history towards Christ the Lord - we will come to understand that inside it no one can be “elevated” above the others. On the contrary, in the Church is necessary for someone “to lowered themselves” to be at the service of brothers along the way.

Jesus established the Church by placing at its head the Apostolic College, in which the apostle Peter is the “rock” (cf. Mt 16:18), one who is to “confirm” his brothers in faith (cf. Lk 22, 32 ). But in this Church, like in an inverted pyramid, the summit is located below the base. This is why those who exercise authority are are called “ministers,” because, according to the original meaning of the word, they are the least of all. It is by serving the People of God that each Bishop becomes, for the portion of the flock entrusted to him, vicarius Christi [vicar of Christ], the vicar of that Jesus who at the Last Supper stooped down to wash the feet of the apostles (cf. Jn 13:1-15). And, on a similar horizon, the Successor of Peter is none other than the servant of the servants of God.

Let us never forget it! For the disciples of Jesus, yesterday, today and always, the only authority is the authority of service, the only power is the power of the cross, in the words of the Master: “You know that the rulers of the Gentiles lord it over them, and the great ones make their authority over them felt. But it shall not be so among you. Rather, whoever wishes to be great among you shall be your servant; whoever wishes to be first among you shall be your slave.”(Mt 20: 25-27). It shall not be so among you: in this expression we reach the heart of the mystery of the Church - “it shall not be so among you” - and receive the necessary light to understand hierarchical service.

In a synodal Church, the Synod of Bishops is only the most evident manifestation of a dynamic of communion that inspires all ecclesial decisions.

The first level of exercising collegiality happens in the particular Churches. After recalling the noble institution of the diocesan Synod, in which Priests and Laity are called to collaborate with the Bishop for the good of the whole ecclesial community, the Code of Canon Law devotes ample space to those who used to be called the “bodies of communion” of the local Church: the Council of Priests, the College of Consultors, the Chapter of Canons and the Pastoral Council. Only to the extent that these bodies remain connected with the “low” and start from the people, from everyday problems, can a Church Synod begin to take shape: these instruments, which sometimes proceed with fatigue, must be treated as an opportunity for listening and sharing.

The second level is that of Ecclesiastical Provinces and Regions, of Particular Councils and especially Episcopal Conferences. We must reflect about how to achieve even more, through these organizations, the interim instances of collegiality, perhaps by integrating and updating some aspects of the ancient ecclesiastical order. The hope of the Council that such bodies would contribute to the growth of the spirit of episcopal collegiality has not yet been fully realized. We are at half way, at a part of the journey. In a synodal Church, as I have said, “it is not not advisable for the Pope to take the place of local Bishops in the discernment of every issue which arises in their territory. In this sense, I am conscious of the need to promote a sound “decentralization””.

The last level is that of the universal Church. Here the Synod of Bishops, representing the catholic episcopate, becomes an expression of episcopal collegiality within a wholly synodal Church. Two different words, “episcopal collegiality” and “wholly synodal Church.” This manifests collegialitas affectiva [affective collegiality], which may in some circumstances also become “effective”, joining the Bishops among themselves and with the Pope in the care for the People of God.

The commitment to building a synodal Church - a mission to which we are all called, each in the role that the Lord has entrusted to them - is laden with ecumenical implications. For this reason, talking to a delegation from the Patriarchate of Constantinople, I have recently reaffirmed the conviction that “the careful examination of how in the Church the principle of synodality and the service of the one who presides are articulated, will make a significant contribution to the progress of relations between our Churches”.

I am convinced that, in a synodal Church, also the exercise of the Petrine primacy may receive greater light. The Pope is not, by himself, above the Church; but inside it as a baptized person among the baptized and inside the episcopal College as Bishop among Bishops, called at the same time - as Successor of the apostle Peter - to lead the Church of Rome that presides over all the Churches in love.

While I reaffirm the need and urgency of thinking about “a conversion of the papacy”, I willingly repeat the words of my predecessor Pope John Paul II: “As Bishop of Rome I am fully aware [...] that Christ ardently desires the full and visible communion of all those Communities in which, by virtue of God's faithfulness, his Spirit dwells. I am convinced that I have a particular responsibility in this regard, above all in acknowledging the ecumenical aspirations of the majority of the Christian Communities and in heeding the request made of me to find a way of exercising the primacy which, while in no way renouncing what is essential to its mission, is nonetheless open to a new situation”.

Our gaze extends also to humanity. A synodal Church is like a signal raised up among the nations (cf. Is 11:12) in a world that - while invoking participation, solidarity and transparency in the administration of public affairs - often places the fate of entire populations in the greedy hands of small groups of power. As a Church that “walks together” with men, sharing in the hardships of history, we cultivate the dream that the rediscovery of the inviolable dignity of peoples and of the function of service of authority may also help civil society to grow in justice and fraternity, generating a world that is more beautiful and more worthy of man for the generations that come after us. Thank you.”

Synod15: God’s love is wide enough to encompass all

Yesterday and today, the Synod Fathers heard from 15 of the "auditors" - mostly married couples, who are there at the Synod. The full texts of these have been published and the following is the passage that stood out for me, in what I have to say reads like a pretty mixed bag:

"We should not continually separate husband and wife for ministry in the parish, but rather let their sacrament shine by allowing them to work as a team. [...] If a church is meant to be a family of families, then we should encourage our seminarians to be priests in love with their people, not merely priests in charge of a parish. Our faith is based on relationship with God, but it is learned and lived out in relationship with others. (Tony Witczak, USA)"

This morning also saw interventions (published in full) from the "fraternal delegates", i.e., representatives of other Christian churches. Here the Syrian-Orthodox Archbishop of Zahle and Bekaa in Lebanon spoke particularly beautifully about the Eucharist:

"[The] Eastern Orthodox Church believes in the principle of economy which in Aramaic is mdabronutho. This principle finds the sacrament of the Eucharist to be a medicine for wounded souls, as well as an aid for people who want to recover their relationship with the Lord. Such a sacrament, that is effectively a salvific one, should not be part of the standards of punishment, except in some exceptional cases. The Eucharist is not a prize or a reward, but the means through which the Lord Jesus heals our weaknesses, and draws us to him. As Pope Francis said in his Corpus Christi homily last year: "The Eucharist is not a prize for the good, but the strength of sinners.""

Timothy Thornton, the Anglican bishop of Truro, emphasized the persistence of change in the life of a family and of the Church:

"A key part of families is that they change. Whenever you’re privileged to be a part of a family in its journey as a pastor you’re seeing a snapshot, a moment in time which has both a history and a future. We see a glimpse and don’t always fully understand, nor should we be given the privilege of being with the family throughout its journey.

All families change. When a couple announce their engagement they’re already looking to the future with hope, joy and some concern. When a couple marry they‘re full of plans about the future. When a baby is born the parents enjoy the moment but immediately they look to the future and wonder. We don’t want the baby to stay a baby that would be very odd. We hope and pray it will grow, develop and mature.

Change is a key part of the Christian faith. It’s at the heart of who we are and what we believe. Just look around this Hall and see all the change that’s taking place all the time. Every day we’re called to be converted to Christ, turn away from sin and turn to God. Every day we open ourselves to the possibility of transformation. That’s why all Christians are full of joy and hope every day. I was thrilled when I read Evangelii Gaudium, the joy of the gospel. That is what we all need to put before people. I’m sorry to say the biggest problem that faces my denomination is that we, as Christians, appear irrelevant to many people. We appear dull, boring and lacking in any sense of joy or hope."

Dr. Tim MacQuiban, Director of the Methodist Ecumenical Office Rome, concluded his intervention with a call for being welcoming towards all:

"The family, however defined, is the place of mutual care and concern, compassion and helpfulness, giving and receiving, sharing and discipline, forgiving and being forgiven, whether in the traditional family or the family of faithful disciples who constitute local ecclesial communities. The Kingdom of God into which we are called is one of mercy and grace. God’s love is wide enough to encompass all. The Church which witnesses to God’s love revealed supremely in Jesus Christ should reflect this with appropriate teaching and pastoral support of those who embrace a single state or relationships without the blessing of the “gift” of children so that they may feel included and welcomed within the “household of faith”, the Church."

Dr. A. Roy Medley, general secretary of American Baptist Churches USA, spoke with great conviction about the need to offer Jesus' friendship and not our own judgment to those around us:

"Amidst such experiences [of dysfunction] people yearn for mercy. Hence, in Baptist hymnology, Jesus as friend, is an important theme. Hymns such as "What a Friend We Have in Jesus," and "There is Not a Friend Like the Lowly Jesus," express for us the presence of God in the midst of our imperfections and struggles. They remind us of the one who in his vocation of suffering servant enters our woundedness. This is the one who invites sinners to sit at his table; the one who is "gentle and humble in heart, in whom we find rest for our souls" (Matt 11:29); the one to whom we pray in all confidence, "Lord, have mercy."

This is the presence of Christ and his church the world longs for but seldom expects. Instead they see us abandoning them in the midst of their greatest personal struggles. Two years ago, I was on a midnight flight and I was squeezed next to a young man 20 years old. During our 3 hour flight he kept waking me as he ordered one gin and tonic after another. By his fourth he was quite talkative and he began to pour out to me, a stranger, the heartbreak of his life. He was on his way home, having been arrested for possession of marijuana. He had a learning disorder and could not read - a fact that brought him much shame throughout his school years. His family life was a mess. And on it went for half an hour or more when he then asked me, "So, what do you do?" "I am a Baptist minister," I replied. What he said next hurt me deeply: "So, I guess you have just been sitting there judging me." "No, Son," I said, "my heart has been breaking for you."

This is the question the world asks the church, "Does God's heart break for me? Does the church's heart break for me?" Does this Jesus still invite sinners to his table? In the imperfection of our lives, can we discover through you, "What a friend we have in Jesus, all our sins and griefs to bear?""

An interesting observation made by a Synod Father, that reminded me of von Balthasar's way of speaking about the Trinity as the "transcendent origin" of human sexuality, was the intervention of Archbishop Mark Coleridge during one of the "free" discussion sessions, who said that:

"the Eucharist is in some sense sexual. At its epicentre are the words of Christ: “This is my body given for you”. This is what redeemed sexuality is – as distinct from unredeemed sexuality which says: “This is your body taken for me”. If the Eucharist is in some sense sexual, so too is married sexuality in some sense Eucharistic. We need to explore that connection more deeply, and in that task married couples have to lead the way."

On a related topic, Fr. Manuel Dorantes - the Spanish speaking assistant to Fr. Federico Lombardi - reported the following intervention by a Synod Father during today's press conference, saying:

"The topic of marriage preparation, especially sexual education, was discussed and there was a request for the Church to enter into this context in a clear way, given that current sexual education is very negative and disastrous. And often the parents in a family themselves don't speak about the beauty of sexuality with their own children, leaving this task to public education. The Church herself needs to take on this role and present the Good News of human sexuality as a path of love and not as a path of sin."

And finally, let's again conclude with Pope Francis' homily from this morning, where he attacked hypocrisy:

"Hypocrisy has no color, rather it plays with half-tones. It insinuates and seduces in a "chiaroscuro", with the allure of the lie. In today's reading, Jesus and the disciples are in the midst of a crowd that is so packed that people are trampling on each other's feet, highlighting Christ's frank warning to his disciples: "Beware of the leaven of the Pharisees". It is a very small thing, yeast, but Jesus talks about it as if to say "virus". Like a doctor who says to his collaborators to pay attention to the risks of an epidemic.

Hypocrisy is that way of living, of act, of speaking that is not clear. Maybe it smiles, maybe it is serious ... It isn't light, it isn't shade ... It moves in a way that seems not to threaten anyone, like the serpent, but it has the charm of the chiaroscuro. It has the charm of things not being clear, of not saying things clearly; the charm of lies, of appearances ... To the Pharisees, hypocrites, Jesus also said that they were full of themselves, of vanity, they liked to walk in the streets by showing that they were important, educated people ...

Jesus, however, reassures the crowd. "Do not be afraid," he says, because "there is nothing concealed that will not be revealed, nor secret that will not be known." As if to say that hiding does not help, even though the leaven of the Pharisees lead, and still leads, people to loving darkness more than light.

This yeast is a virus that will make you to get sick and die. Beware! This yeast brings darkness. Beware! But there is one who is greater than this: it is the Father who is in heaven. 'Are not five sparrows sold for two small coins? Yet not one of them has escaped the notice of God. Even the hairs of your head have all been counted.'. And then, in the final exhortation: 'Do not be afraid. You are worth more than many sparrows'. In front of all these fears that leave us this way and that way, and that give us the virus, the yeast of pharisaical hypocrisy, Jesus tells us: 'There is a Father. There is a Father who loves you. There is a Father who cares for you'."

Synod 15: let us not be fooled by those who limit God’s love

Now that the third, and most controversial, part of the Instrumentum Laboris, dealing with how to approach challenging family situations, is being discussed, the intensity of messages heard from the Synod rises too.

For example, the Kazakhstani Archbishop Tomasz Peta didn’t mince his words, when he said, in his intervention during one of the General Congregations:

“Blessed Paul VI said in 1972: “From some crack the smoke of Satan has entered the temple of God.”

I am convinced that these were prophetical words of the holy pope, the author of “Humanae vitae”. During the Synod last year, “the smoke of Satan” was trying to enter the aula of Paul VI.

Namely:
1) The proposal to admit to Holy Communion those who are divorced and living in new civil unions;
2) The affirmation that cohabitation is a union which may have in itself some values;
3) The pleading for homosexuality as something which is allegedly normal.

Some synod fathers have not understood correctly the appeal of Pope Francis for an open discussion and started to bring forward ideas which contradict the bi-millennial Tradition of the Church, rooted in the Eternal Word of God.

Unfortunately, one can still perceive the smell of this “infernal smoke” in some items of the “Instrumentum Laboris” and also in the interventions of some synod fathers this year.”

Another Synod Father who is certainly not using a new language is the Guinean Cardinal Robert Sarah who characterizes the present situation saying that “we find ourselves between gender ideology and ISIS” and elaborates it thus:

“Several clues enable us to intuit the same demonic origin of these two movements. Unlike the Spirit of Truth that promotes communion in the distinction (perichoresis), these encourage confusion (homo-gamy) or subordination (poly-gamy). Furthermore, they demand a universal and totalitarian rule, are violently intolerant, destroyers of families, society and the Church, and are openly Christianophobic.

“We are not contending against creatures of flesh and blood ....” We need to be inclusive and welcoming to all that is human; but what comes from the Enemy cannot and must not be assimilated. You can not join Christ and Belial! What Nazi-Fascism and Communism were in the 20th century, Western homosexual and abortion Ideologies and Islamic Fanaticism are today.”

There are very different takes on what is happening at the Synod too. For example, the papally-appointed Synod special secretary, Archbishop Bruno Forte described the working of the Synod as follows:

“Pope Francis has asked us to speak with complete freedom about everything. He pointed out at the beginning of the Extraordinary Synod: “There is nothing that we cannot speak about.” And this is taking place and I think it’s very constructive, because it shows a living Church, co-responsible and involved. To translate this participation and involvement into a spirit of conspiracy or divisions is, I think, a stretch, coming from those who see things only from the outside, without experiencing them from within. Do not forget that we are all men of faith, who feel responsibility towards God and towards our brothers. And that brings us together much more strongly than any possible and hypothetical partisan conflicts that could apply.”

Speaking about challenges, the Colombian Cardinal Rubén Salazar Gómez said:

“In Colombia, for example, only one in three couples is married, while the others live in free or temporary unions, and this creates a fairly big problem in the social life of the nation. Then, it is necessary that the Church, especially the Church in Colombia, is able to proclaim with courage, but also with clarity and with force, the Gospel of the family. This means that one rediscovers the value and the beauty of family life, the beauty of marriage, the beauty of conjugal love, the beauty of the relationship between parents and children, the beauty of the relationships within the family. We must rediscover all this, because the fundamental meaning of these values got a bit lost. And for us, in society, I think this announcement will be welcomed with true joy, because one feels the need to rediscover all that is essential for the life of the family and if it is fundamental to family life it is so also to the life of society.”

Finally, let’s again conclude with Pope Francis’ homily from this morning’s mass, where he started by speaking about the gratuitousness of salvation:

“One of the hardest things to understand, for all Christians, is the gratuitousness of salvation in Jesus Christ. We are used to hearing that Jesus is the Son of God, who came to love, to save us and who died for us. But we have heard it so many times that we have become used to it. When we enter into the mystery of God, into this love without limits, we become astonished and perhaps prefer not to understand it.

Jesus also seems a bit hard on these lawyers because he says strong things to them. Says strong and very hard things. ‘You have taken away the key of knowledge. You yourselves did not enter and you stopped those trying to enter, because you have taken away the key’, that is the key to the gratuity of salvation, the key to that knowledge. And these doctors of the law thought that one could be saved by only respecting all the commandments, and who did not do it was condemned. So they shortened the horizons of God and they made the love of God small, small, to the measurement of each of us. This the battle that both Jesus and Paul fought to defend the doctrine. [...]

Jesus says: ‘The greatest love is this: to love God with all your life, with all your heart, with all your strength, and your neighbor as yourself’. Because it is the only commandment that is the height of the gratuity of God’s salvation. And then Jesus adds: ‘In this commandment are all others, because it calls - and makes all good - all the others’. But the source is love; the horizon is love. If you have closed the door, and you have taken away the key of love, you will not be up to the height of the gratuity of salvation you received. This struggle for control of salvation - that only these will be saved, those who do these things - hasn’t finished with Jesus and Paul. [...]

This fight does not end, and it is also struggle that we carry inside. And it will do us well to ask today: Do I believe that the Lord saved me gratuitously? Do I believe that I do not deserve salvation? And if I merit something it is through Jesus Christ and what He has done for me? Let us ask ourselves these questions today, only like that will we be faithful to this love that is so merciful: the love of a father and of a mother, because God says He is like a mother to us; love, great horizons, no limits, no restrictions. And let us not be fooled by the doctors who limit this love.”

Synod15: martyrdom of a document (Part 2)

The circuli minores have now published their reports on Part 2 of the Instrumentum Laboris, entitled “The Discernment of the Family Vocation.“ What I would like to do again is to pull together the contents of the English, Italian, Spanish and German reports, grouping it by topic and using acronyms of the source group names from their official list (i.e., AA will refer to Circulus Anglicus “A”):

1. Need for closer links to Scripture.
   AA: “Seen through the lens of the Holy Family of Nazareth, the text would benefit from a more abundant use of Sacred Scripture, notably Luke Chapters 1 and 2, as well as examples from the Old Testament.”
   AD: “In the material on family and God’s salvific plan, the text lacks grounding in the Book of Tobit and the Song of Songs, which is vital to the Scriptural presentation of marriage.”
   IA: “There is a need for enriching the text with a greater biblical and patristic inspiration.”
   IB: “As in Part I, here too there is a need to report the shortage of references to God’s Word and the almost total lack of reference to the Tradition of the Church.”
   HB: “More explicit reference to both the Old and New Testaments (the spousal love of God towards his people) and the rich post-conciliar magisterium on the family are proposed.”
   G: “Any impression should be avoided that Holy Scripture be used only as a source of quotes for dogmatic, legal or ethical beliefs. The Law of the New Covenant is the work of the Holy Spirit in the hearts of believers (cf. Catechism of the Catholic Church no. 1965 to 1966). The written word must be integrated into the living Word that dwells in the hearts of people in the Holy Spirit. This gives the Scriptures far-reaching spiritual power.”


2. Use a positive, new language.
   AB: “We propose alongside the term “indissolubility” to use a language which is less legal, and which shows better the mystery of God’s love speaking of marriage as a grace, a blessing, and a lifelong covenant of love.”
   AC: “The need to present the indissolubility of marriage as a gift from God rather than a burden and to find a more positive way of speaking about it, so that people can fully appreciate the gift. This relates to the larger question of language, as the Synod looks to shape a language which, in the words of the Instrumentum Laboris, is “symbolic”, “experiential”, “meaningful”, “clear”, “inviting”, “open”, “joyful”, “optimistic” and “hopeful”."
   AD: “Some said the text needs to frame the notion of “indissolubility” more positively, rather than treating it as a burden.”
   IA: “[There is a] desire to use a language capable of moving men and women of our times to easily understand that the Gospel of the family is the Good News of salvation, addressed to them.”
   IB: “It becomes necessary and urgent to be careful about the language used and to judge the actual comprehensibility of what is expressed. The Christian truth is the Person of Christ who chose to be born, grow, live in a family and, to this day does no stop communicating his message, but he could not settle for it just being well formulated: it must be able to truly “water the earth” (Isaiah 55:10).”


3. Provide “best practices.”
   AA: “The final document would benefit from a consideration of “best practices,” which would show families how to more fully and faithfully live out their vocation. At the heart of such “best practices” is the receiving of the Word of God in the family. [... “B]est practices” should also address proper catechesis and prayer and worship, including prayer within each family.”
   AC: “The need to develop resources in the vital area of family prayer, understood in both formal and less formal ways, both liturgically and devotionally. These resources would again have to be culturally sensitive. [...]
   One thing which the Synod might consider producing is a list of practical initiatives or strategies to support families and to help those that are in trouble. This would be something concrete and would be in keeping with the essentially practical character of this second Synod on marriage and the family.”
   AD: “Some in our group spoke about the need for the text to list devotions that both enhance and express family life and spirituality. The rosary was central to the discussion; so was the importance of parents reading Scripture to children, and siblings reading Scripture together. Bishops stressed the value of families attending Sunday Eucharist and other liturgical celebrations together, and were surprised the text didn’t focus on this in greater detail. Some suggested that various practices of popular piety be listed as concrete expressions of family devotions.”


4. Present marriage in the context of the history of salvation.
   AB: “The reflection should illustrate how the Divine Pedagogy for marriage and the family has accompanied the entire history of salvation and continues right until our day. [... The Genesis] account of the creation of marriage presents [...] the three basic characteristics of marriage, as it was in the beginning – monogamy, permanence, and equality of the sexes. [...]
   But the Divine pedagogy of salvation history concerning marriage and the family reached its climax with the Son of God’s entry in human history, as Jesus Christ was born into a human family. It was considered inappropriate for a Rabbi to speak with a woman yet Jesus dared to speak to a woman, who was a Samaritan – an “excommunicated” and a renowned sinner – something even more scandalous. To a woman who was brought before him prior to her being stoned for the fact that she had committed adultery, he said: “I do not condemn you. Go and sin no more.” He dirtied his hands through work, but not with stones to throw at others.”
   AC: “The need to see more clearly how the Church through the ages has come to a deeper understanding and surer presentation of the teaching on marriage and the family which has its roots in Christ himself. The teaching has been constant, but the articulation of it and the practice based upon that articulation have not been.”
   IC: “The fact of the Incarnation of the Word in a human family, in fact in the family of Nazareth, is the stone that stirs the history of the world with its novelty. We must immerse ourselves in the mystery of Jesus’ birth, of Mary’s yes to the angel’s annunciation made that Word germinate in her womb, of the assent of Joseph who does his part by naming Jesus and taking Mary with him, of the recognition by the Magi and the plotting of Herod, of the participation of Jesus in the story of his exiled, persecuted and fugitive people, of his anticipation by Zechariah and the joy of John the Baptist, of the transmission of blessing from generation to generation, of the welcoming of Israel through its shepherds, through Simeon and Anna, of the presentation of Jesus in the Temple that fulfills the promise, of the losing and finding of Jesus who wants “be in his Father’s house” (Lk 2:49). And, then, we must be there during the endless thirty years where Jesus has digested the prayer and religious tradition of his people to learn the faith of the fathers and to let that faith rise to a telling of the mystery of the Kingdom. [...] This, more than the “sacred” family, is the family made “holy and sanctified” by the incarnation of him who is the Son of the Father, the son of Mary and Joseph.”


5. Speak also about need for sacrifice and conversion.
   AC: “In speaking of the joy of marriage and family life, there is a need to speak also of the life of sacrifice and even the suffering which this involves and so to set joy within its proper context of the Paschal Mystery.”
   IA: “Make the primacy of grace, the recognition of sin and the need to encourage ways of conversion more explicit, recalling that the Gospel truth about the family is incarnate in the life of a couple through the working of the Holy Spirit, the Spirit of divine love that elevates the human love of a couple to the reality of the Sacrament.”
   IC: “The path of the cross is therefore also at the heart of the Word of Jesus on marriage and the family, in the sense that these goods, while great and sacred, are to be configured in the mystery of the New Covenant, which brings the ancient one to completion, of which marital love is the privileged image.”


6. Marriage and family life as a vocation.
   AA: “In Jesus, the fulfillment of God’s revelation, the family uncovers its calling within the universal call to holiness. For the disciple of Jesus, every vocation calls the person and the community in two distinct and complementary dimensions. We are called to communion and we are called for mission. We see this in the call of the 12 Apostles. They are called to be friends of Jesus and sent out to preach. The same is true of those disciples who are called to family life.”
   IB: “A renewed alliance is to be recommended between the different forms of vocation to love: marriage, the priesthood, consecrated life. A fruitful exchange of gifts is accomplished in the communion of vocations, that enlivens and enriches the ecclesial community. We live in a time that calls for the ability to “stay close,” to accompany, to accept, to forgive. Family and consecrated life can learn to accompany and support each other, helping each other in their respective difficulties, also experiencing new forms of communion and sharing.”


7. Use clear language.
   AA: “Though every effort should be made to provide for streamlined, attractive language, a primary concern was the clarity of well-grounded explanations of Church teaching on marriage and the family.”
   IB: “The words “nature” and “natural”, of great importance in Christian philosophical and theological tradition, conceived from a perspective of creation, appear repeatedly in the text. Here it is suggested that it ought not be overlooked that such terminology, in cultural circles with which we dialogue, is not unambiguous and is difficult to understand for normal people; their use is therefore not easy at the pastoral level.”


8. Emphasize the Word of God in the life of the family.
   AB: “[F]ocus on the centrality of the Word of God in the theology of marriage, in the pastoral care of the family, and in family piety. The Christian community welcomes the Word of God especially when proclaimed at the Sunday Liturgy. Thus a goal for every couple and family would be to worship together faithfully at Mass every Sunday. Married couples and families also encounter the Word of God in the array of devotions and celebrations that are part of our Catholic heritage. Such piety includes approaching together the sacrament of reconciliation, common prayer and reading of the Scriptures, and other encounters with God’s word in catechesis and prayer.”
   AC: “There is a need to draw more deeply and richly from the Scripture, not just in citing biblical texts but in presenting the Bible as a matrix for Christian married and family life. As at Vatican II, the Bible would be a prime resource for the shaping of a new language to speak of marriage and the family; and the Apostolic Exhortation Verbum Domini could serve as a resource for practical suggestions.”


9. The relationship between mercy and justice.
   AB: “The group felt a strong need for a deeper reflection on the relationship between mercy and justice, particularly as it is presented in Misericordiae Vultus. [...] God never gives up on his mercy. It is mercy which reveals God’s true face. God’s mercy reaches out to all of us, especially to those who suffer, those who are weak, and those who fail. “How can I give you up, O Ephraim! How can I hand you over, O Israel… My heart recoils within me, my compassion grows warm and tender.” (Hs 11:8-9) As Pope Francis stresses in Misericordiae Vultus, God’s anger lasts for a moment, but his mercy lasts forever.”
   G: “We have extensively discussed the terms that are often presented as opposed: mercy and truth, grace and justice and their theological relationships among each other. In God they are not opposed: Because God is love, in God justice and mercy coincide. The mercy of God is the fundamental truth of revelation, which does not stand in opposition to other revealed truths. Rather, it opens to us the deepest reason, since it tells us why God has emptied himself in his Son and why Jesus Christ is persistently present for our salvation in his Church through his Word and Sacraments. The mercy of God reveals to us the reason and the purpose of the entire work of salvation. The righteousness of God is his mercy with which he makes us righteous. [...]
   As meant by Thomas Aquinas and the Council of Trent, the application of the basic principles of prudence and wisdom is due to every particular, often complex, situation. It is not about exceptions, where God’s Word is not to be valid, but it is a question of the fair and equitable application of the Word of Jesus - for example, the Word about the indissolubility of marriage - in intelligence and wisdom. Thomas Aquinas has made the necessity of a concretizing application clear when he says: “Intelligence is not only about the considerations of reason, but also its application to action, which is the purpose of practical reason (STh II-II-47,3: “ad prudentiam pertinet non solum consideratio rationis, sed etiam applicatio ad opus, quae est finis practicae rationis”).”


10. Natural marriage.
    AD: “Some bishops felt that we need to better understand the relationship between the newness of the Christian sacrament of matrimony and the natural structure of marriage built into God’s plan from the start.”
    G: “Finally, we have struggled with the concept of natural marriage. In the history of mankind, natural marriage is always also culturally marked. The term natural marriage could imply that there is a natural way of life of people without cultural conditioning. We therefore propose the formulation: “Creation-based marriage”.”


11. Need for nuanced analysis of obstacles to marriage among young people.
    AC: “The need for a more nuanced understanding of why young people these days decide not to marry or to delay marriage, often for a long time. The Instrumentum Laboris presents fear as the dominant motive. But it is also true that young people at times do not see the point of marriage or regard it as a purely personal or private matter which makes a public ceremony irrelevant to them. They are also affected in many ways by a culture of options which baulks at closing doors, and they prefer to test a relationship before making any final commitment. Powerful economic factors can also have their effect. We need to beware of a too simplistic reading of a complex phenomenon.”
    HA: “When speaking about youth and marriage, it is done from the perspective of fear, which is not enough, it is an anthropological question: they live day by day, “forever” does not fit their way of thinking, they do not ask themselves that, it is another way of looking at life. Perhaps we could speak of informality: a piece of paper does not make marriage and perhaps we have surrounded it with so many formalities that it does not fit the minds of young people, who often identify formality with hypocrisy.”


12. Definition of marriage.
    AD: “The Instrumentum Laboris nowhere defines marriage. This is a serious defect. It causes ambiguity throughout the text. Most bishops agreed that the document should add the definition of marriage from Vatican II, Gaudium et Spes 48.”
    HA: “There is a need for a definition of the family, either from Gaudium et Spes #52 or other documents such as Familiaris Consortio.”


13. Emphasis on graduality.
    HA: “We must emphasize graduality and processuality to welcome the process through which God communicates the grace of the Alliance, which educates in a way where every person is taken into account, progressively, in community, that corrects, accompanies and forgives. Being the pedagogy of God, processuality is also contained in Tradition (St. Agustine’s De cathequizandis rudibus) and it is also indicated by Aparecida (280, 281). [...] Following the thesis of the “semina Verbi,” it can not be ignored that there are many positive values in other types of families.”
    G: “Another aspect of our discussion was the [...] gradual introduction of people to the sacrament of marriage, ranging from non-binding relations, via unmarried couples living together and those who are only civilly married up to ecclesially-valid, sacramental marriage. To accompany these people pastorally at the various stages, is a great pastoral task, but also a great joy. [...]
    The Church’s teaching on marriage has historically developed and deepened. Initially it was the humanization of marriage that has been condensed in the conviction of monogamy. In the light of the Christian faith, the personal dignity of the spouses has been recognized and the deeper divine likeness of man perceived in the relationship of husband and wife. In a further step, the ecclesial nature of marriage has been deepened and it became understood as a domestic church. Finally, the church became explicitly aware of the sacramentality of marriage. This historical path of deepening can today be seen also in the lives of many people. They are initially affected by the human dimension of marriage, they let themselves be convinced by the Christian view of marriage in the environment of the Church and therefore find a way to celebrate sacramental marriage. Just like the historical development of the Church’s teaching has taken time, so too must ecclesial ministry give the people of today time for maturing on their way towards sacramental marriage and not act according to the principle of “all or nothing”. Here we need to unfold the idea of ​​a “step by step process” (FC 9) in the present, for which John Paul II has already laid a foundation in Familiaris Consortio [...] (FC 65). The Church stands inevitably in tension between the necessary clarity of the doctrine of marriage and the family on the one hand and the concrete pastoral task on the other hand, also to support and convince those people who only partially coincide in their life with the principles of the Church. With them it is important to take steps on the way to a fullness of life in marriage and family, as the Gospel of the family proclaims.”


14. The danger of idealizing marriage.
    AD: “Others saw a danger in referring to Catholic teaching as simply an “ideal” to be pursued and honored but not practical for the living of daily life. They described this as an approach that implies that only the “pure” can live the Gospel, but not ordinary people.”
    IA: “Among these risks is worth mentioning the confusion of the Christian proposal with an abstract ideal.”


15. Reinforce close, dynamic relationship among family, Church and God.
    AB: “God recognizes the image of Himself in the faithfulness of his spouses and confirms with his blessing this fruit of his grace. The deepest meaning of the indissolubility of marriage, is then, the affirmation and protection of these beautiful and positive qualities that sustain marriage and family life, most especially in times of turbulence and conflict. The Church, therefore, looks to married couples as the heart of the entire family, which, in turn, looks to Jesus especially to his faithful love in the darkness of the cross.”


16. The need for mercy.
    AB: “All of us need God’s mercy. In many societies today there is a sense of self-sufficiency, whereby people feel that they have no need of mercy and no awareness of their own sinfulness. At times this is due to an inadequate catechesis on sin, not recognizing sin as a wounding of our relationship with God and with each other, a wound which can be healed only through the saving power of God’s mercy. On the other hand there can be a tendency for us to put human limits on God’s mercy.”


17. Find balance between local and universal.
    AC: “A great richness and challenge of our discussions continues to be the different modulations of marriage and the family in the various cultures represented in the group. There are certainly points of convergence, arising from our shared sense of God’s plan which is inscribed in creation and which comes to its fullness in Christ crucified and risen, as proclaimed by the Church. But the different ways in which that mystery takes flesh in different parts of the world make it challenging to balance the local and the universal. That remains an overarching task of this Synod.”


18. Opposition to seeing traces of good in irregular relationships.
    AD: “The text tends to treat irregular relationships as somehow also containing “seeds of the Word.” Some bishops felt this was inappropriate and misleading.”


19. Realism about valid conditions for separation.
    AD: “Bishops said the text should present the canonical reasons for separation of spouses and reasons for seeking an annulment. We need to be realistic about marital problems rather than simply encouraging people to stay together. Again, violence against women was a key part of the discussion.”


20. Marriage and family spirituality.
    HA: “Married spirituality is born of the presence of God in the midst of spouses.”


21. [Differences of opinion reported.]
    AC: “One thing which the Synod might consider producing is a list of practical initiatives or strategies to support families and to help those that are in trouble. This would be something concrete and would be in keeping with the essentially practical character of this second Synod on marriage and the family. On many of these points there was consensus, on others there was wide if not universal agreement, and on a few there was significant disagreement.”
    AD: “One person felt the text’s grasp of Scripture could be improved by embracing newer scholarship. The person worried that many of us were reading Scripture in too fundamentalist a manner, and other ways of interpreting Scripture might be more fruitful. Others disagreed and thought that the understanding of Scripture in the text was adequate.”

Synod15: the Gospel always goes against the current

I wasn’t going to mention it, but what started out as potentially just noise is gaining in scale as time passes. Yesterday morning, there was a report about an alleged letter having been written by 13 cardinals and hand-delivered to Pope Francis, raising concerns about the procedures of the synod and it initial working document, the Instrumentum Laboris. I won’t say any more about the letter’s supposed content or signatories, since both have since been repeatedly disputed, although some of the cardinals who supposedly signed this letter did admit to having written a similar one to Pope Francis. My main reason for mentioning this disputed letter is to provide context for the reactions from various Synod Fathers that do shed light on their thinking.

First, a statement by the spokesperson of Cardinal George Pell, who was alleged to have hand-delivered the letter to Pope Francis, says - in addition to denouncing the publication of private letters and expressing a concern about the membership of the drafting committee of the Synod’s final report:

“[M]inority elements want to change the Church’s teachings on the proper dispositions necessary for the reception of Communion. Obviously there is no possibility of change on this doctrine.”

A rather interesting move, ahead of Pope Francis deciding what to do after the Synod ...

While several cardinals who are alleged to have signed it have denied any involvement, Cardinal Wilfrid Fox Napier confirmed that he did sign a similar letter - as did Cardinal Pell, while Cardinal Donald Wuerl, who is on the 10-member drafting committee for the final report, argued that the suspicions of irregularity were already brought to the Synod as prejudices:

“If you’re convinced this is all rigged, then you’re going to see that everywhere. I think that was the single most powerful negative element as this synod opened, that there was an aura around fostered by a number saying this isn’t going to be a fair synod. So no matter what you do, that’s the starting point. Everything looks yellow to the jaundiced eye.”

Cardinal Gerhard Müller, on the other hand, refused to either confirm or deny whether his being on the list of alleged signatories is correct. Instead he delivered a scathing attack on those who published the letter:

“The scandal is that a private letter of the Pope is made public. This is a new Vatileaks: the Pope’s private documents are the private property of the Pope and no one else. No one can publish it, I do not know how that could have happened. Whoever did it needs to justify themselves. The intention of those who wanted it published is to sow strife, create tensions. That seems clear to me.”

Cardinal Müller then launched into a categorical denial of any questions about his loyalty to the pope:

“I think [Pope Francis] spoke about those who say that in the Roman Curia there is opposition against the pope [when he warned against a “hermeneutic of conspiracy”]. Those who say and write that there are wolves, that Francis is surrounded by wolves. It is an offensive and criminal expression. I’m not a wolf against the Pope. I know who the Pope is and what primacy means, a thousand times more than those who say these things. As prefect of the Congregation, I am the first collaborator of the Holy Father, not just me but all those who are part of it. And I won’t allow my obedience and my service to the Pope and the Church to be put in doubt.”

To conclude the matter, Fr. Federico Lombardi, director of the Holy See Press Office, stated:

“[I]n terms of content, the difficulties included in the letter were mentioned on Monday evening in the Synod Hall, as I have previously said, although not covered extensively or in detail.

As we know, the General Secretary and the Pope responded clearly the following morning. Therefore, to provide this text and this list of signatories some days later constitutes a disruption that was not intended by the signatories (at least by the most authoritative). Therefore it would be inappropriate to allow it to have any influence.

That observations can be made regarding the methodology of the Synod is neither new nor surprising. However, once agreed upon, a commitment is made to put it into practice in the best way possible.”

Turning back to the interviews and interventions with Synod Fathers, a particularly encouraging one is Vatican Radio speaking with don Roberto Rosa, an Italian parish priest whom Pope Francis has personally nominated as Synod Father. Don Rosa explains:

“It was something unexpected, which began with a letter that I sent to the Pope at the beginning of August about some pastoral issues. I wrote without even thinking that would read it. A few days later I received a phone call directly from Pope Francis, who had my letter in his hand and together we talked about several pastoral problems of the family. Then we said goodbye. A few days later, I received the appointment, unexpected, to participate as a Synod Father in this Synod on the family.”

Don Rosa then spoke at length about various challenges related to work - both its lack in some cases and its absolutization in others, where it is at the expense of family life. Asked what he would hope to see the Synod do about these challenges, he replied:

“[T]he Church, above all, should propose to those entrepreneurs who are Catholics, engaged in trade, in supermarkets for example, to make a bold choice: to live Sundays and also bring them into life for their employees. This would lead to a rediscovery of the value of work, which clearly is a tool for bringing ahead one’s own family - “ora et labora”, we have been created by God also for work - however, the ultimate purpose of our lives is not the job, it is celebration. I would say that God created us for Sunday. That’s where the sense is of all the work. [...] The Gospel always goes against the current, it is always a great innovation that makes life more beautiful for men and women, in the world, in the Church. So, let’s rediscover the Gospel of life, of a full life!”

On the subject of a new language and respect for homosexuals, Cardinal John Dew said the following:

“[Homosexuality is] an issue that people have to to talk about and its an issue that families struggle with, really struggle with. Such people need to be respected you know not not condemned but be respected. If this is their sexual orientation that we have to respect them and try somehow, and no one’s too sure how, but to to include them in the life of the Church. When we have documents which talk about intrinsically disordered or being evil, that’s not going to help people. You know we’ve got to find a way to express what the teaching actually says but not putting things in ways that people feel that they are being branded and they’re being told that the are bad or evil. Scripture was written for a particular time, Paul was writing about particular issues and so for people just to pick out something and even for Church authorities to quote something without putting it in context is not helpful for people. I just hope that something will come out in the final document that helps people to see, I’m sure that’s what Pope Francis is trying to do, this trying to help people to see that the Church is here to to support and assist them. And especially when there’s some area, whether it’s an area of sexual morality or some other difficulty in their families that they’re struggling with.”

Synod15: families more important than institutions

Since my last post on the Synod on the Family, which today enters it’s second week, there have been a number of interviews and intervention texts published.

Archbishop Diarmuid Martin of Dublin, in his intervention during one of the General Congregations, spoke about a strong need for change in the language used to speak about marriage and of the need to propose rather than just oppose:

“Our young people make their decisions on marriage and the family within the context of a flawed and antagonistic social culture. It is however not enough to condemn that culture. We have somehow to evangelise that culture. The Synod is called to revitalise the Church’s pastoral concern for marriage and the family and to help believers to see family life as an itinerary of faith. But simply repeating doctrinal formulations alone will not bring the Gospel and the Good News of the Family into an antagonistic society. We have to find a language which helps our young people to appreciate the newness and the challenge of the Gospel.

Where do we find that language? Certainly it cannot be a language which reduces the fullness of the Church’s teaching. We have to find a language which is a bridge to the day-to-day reality of marriage – a human reality, a reality not just of ideals, but of struggle and failure, of tears and joys. Even in within a flawed social culture of the family there are those who seek something more and we have to touch their hearts.

Allow me to give an example. We talk about indissolubility. Most families would not feel that they live indissolubility; they live fidelity and closeness and care in ways we underestimate. As a student, I worked in a centre for prisoners which held a space for women who had to travel long distances before going to visit their spouses in prison. These women were not models of respectable society. They would hardly have been able to pronounce indissolubility. But these women never missed a weekly visit. They understood fidelity, even to a husband who might have betrayed them. And their visit humanised even for a few moment the life of a man whose hope was low.”

In an interview with Vatican Radio, Cardinal Gualtiero Bassetti, archbishop of Perugia, made an important observation about family taking precedence over institutions:

“[In our working group we have] the smallest member of the Synod, Davide, a boy of four months. So, there we have no need for elaborating a definition of the family. The mum every now and again leaves, she goes to breastfeed Davide, because it is clear that the dynamics of the family are more important than those of institutions.”

Cardinal Philippe Nakellentuba Ouédraogo from Burkina Faso then spoke about his expectations for the Synod being a clarification of what living the Gospel means today:

“We expect from this Synod to be precise for Christians and the whole world about what God’s plan is for man, for woman, for marriage and for family life. [...] The Gospel doesn’t change. It is our understanding that can change, improve. So, we have our customs, but what is important for us is to know Christ, to love Christ, to be like Christ. That is, living the Gospel.”

Another example of Gospel-based courage comes from the words of Greek-Catholic Hungarian Bishop Fülöp Kocsis:

“We must assess a situation only sociologically, but through the optics of faith: with the strength of this hope there is nothing to fear, because the hope is that we are already saved. We talked, for example, about the attacks on the Church made by the world, but we mustn’t defend ourselves, though, because Jesus Christ has already defeated the devil and conquered death. This starting point, therefore, is very important.”

In his intervention at the Synod, Bishop Mario Grech of Malta spoke out against ideologizing faith and for of putting one’s faith into practice under the specific circumstances of their life, however imperfect they may be: “When theology becomes ideology, the Christian loses their faith and no longer remains a disciple of Jesus. [...] The values and virtues that make us conform to the will of God and that are fully established and proven in the future kingdom of God, must be practiced now, to the extent that is possible under the imperfect and sinful circumstances of life in the present time, as the parables of the net and the harvest teach.” Bishop Grech then expressed his support for the type of approach taken in Orthodox Christianity with regard to marriage, where the principle of oikonomia os applied:

“[The logic of oikonomia is] the logic of the approximation of the imperfect towards the ideal situation in a particular case. Every human action is in tension towards the ideal and therefore is an approximation to the ‘ideal’. [...] A morally good life does not mean that a person has reached perfection, but rather that the believer is committed and struggles to reach perfection.

The tradition of the Eastern Church states, through the principle of akribeia, that full sacramental marriage is one and must not be dissolved. On the other hand, using the principle of oikonomia, it realizes pastoral mediation in the spirit of indulgence, especially when a person finds themselves in an irreversible situation.”

Pastoral power is not simply in service of the ideal, but for the good of the faithful and can not forget the concrete conditions of life of the believer themselves. A parallel can be drawn between the relationship between akribeia and oikonomia, and the one between justice and pastoral mercy. Two aspects, not opposites, two dimensions of one reality that is developed step by step until it culminates in the fullness of love.”

Fr. Adolfo Nicolas, Superior General of the Jesuits, also made an important point about mercy versus doctrine in an interview with the newspaper Corriere della Sera:

“[In order to make theory and mercy – apparently so antithetical – converge, we must] make room for mercy in the law. For, the law, as we have it in the Church today, is not always also merciful. The law has principles that must be clear. Mercy, on the contrary, is not clear; it always has some ambiguity, because it is impossible to know the depth of the human heart, its weaknesses. Charity cannot be standardized. I have in mind Paul VI, who said to the priests: these are the principles, but please be pastors; accompany people in their reality. Others, on the contrary, have said and say: you have to be pastors, but these are the principles. Apparently, this is the same, but the order is reversed.”

Finally, the moments that stood out from today’s press conference, where the interventions relating already to part 3 of the instrumentum laboris were covered, while the working groups are focusing on part 2, were the following quotes from (unnamed) English-speaking Synod participants:

“For God, no human being is a stranger.”

“Our main task is not, in first place, to tell moral laws and point out sins to people, but it is to show the beauty and value of Christian marriage and the necessity of families through which humanity passes. Sometimes the best thing we can do in such complex, secular situations is to give the testimony of one’s life. A testimony of fidelity and joy.”

Looking back at this post and the several I have already put together about the Synod, the impression may arise that I am being selective about what I share here, that I may omit interventions or interviews that are contrary to my own perspective. This is certainly not my intention and the harmony of what I have shared so far is rooted in the harmony of what I have read coming from the Synod in Rome. Over the weekend, however, I have also come across an interview whose content I do not agree with and that seems dissonant with the rest of what I am reading from the Synod, but I think it is more important to know about it than to pretend that voices like it do not exist. As a result, here are excerpts from an interview with Cardinal John Njue of Nairobi, Kenya, who refers to “the Church’s teaching against homosexuality”:

“It is there in the Bible. It is clear. I think there is not much option. There are facts, such as the fact that God created humanity as Adam and Eve. Whenever someone starts running away from their identity, whatever they do will certainly not be the right thing. If we come to the point of saying that can be changed, there is no logic behind it, with all due respect. Where there is a mistake, a way must be found to help people who have made the mistake to understand that they have done something wrong and need to turn around. It’s not a question of criminalizing or condemning, but we have every right to help the person understand that the way you are living is not how you’re supposed to be.”